>...but I'm just a bit afraid that this new [n-N] idea may just kill
>the ability of mobiles to go cross-country and get into the system.
>Have I missed something while I was on the road?
>You're not trying to kill WideN-n everywhere or something?
Well, in truth, yes in some areas. We need to kill WIDEn-N
where it is flooding so many packets into local LAN's that
the local users cannot get any packets through their own
dgipeaters. But we are replacing it with two better systems:
1) SSn-N will let packets propogate N hops within a state or
ARRL section but not QRM adjacent areas no matter how
big N gets.
2) ##LNKn-N for interstates. This is for the long haul traveler.
But similarly, even a big N only generates N copies and not 200!
3) WIDEn-N will continute to be surpported in those wilderness
areas that have fewer than an ALOHA capacity over several
states or digis.
>I still want the ability to go around the USA, using a path of
>RELAY,WIDE2-2 (or similar) and be able to use the system.
That is a fair path. RELAY,WIDE,WIDE should work
everywhere and give you those 3 hops and be traceable.
But it will generate more dupes than RELAY,##LNKn-N.
Actually, it is hard for me to imagine anywhere in the USA
that is not 3 hops or less from a big city where there is
*or*should*be* an IGate. I guess what I am asking is that
we concentrate on getting the data where it needs to
go, rather than FLOODING everyone with the old WIDEn-N
shotgun approach..
You truckers know where the holes are. Let us know and
then the burden is on us to fill them...
Thanks for the feedback.
de Wb4APR, Bob